Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-mwx4w Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-21T15:57:33.742Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Soil Water Relations of Silverleaf Nightshade (Solanum elaeagnifolium) with Cotton (Gossypium hirsutum)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

J. D. Green ,
Don S. Murray  and
John F. Stone
J. D. Green
Affiliation:
Dep. Agron., Oklahoma State Univ., Stillwater, OK 74078
Don S. Murray
Affiliation:
Dep. Agron., Oklahoma State Univ., Stillwater, OK 74078
John F. Stone
Affiliation:
Dep. Agron., Oklahoma State Univ., Stillwater, OK 74078
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Dryland and irrigated field experiments were established to measure differences in soil water relations throughout the growing season between plots in which cotton was grown with and without silverleaf nightshade interference. Soil moisture readings were taken weekly at 15-cm increments to a maximum depth of 120 and 150 cm during 1984 and 1985, respectively. When cotton was grown with silverleaf nightshade, soil water loss was greater at the lower portion of the soil profile earlier in the growing season than when cotton was grown alone. In the irrigated environment in 1985 when precipitation was higher than normal and the soil moisture content remained above normal, soil water loss did not differ. Cotton lint yield, plant height, and boll size reflected the amount of soil moisture available for growth and development of the crop. A statistical technique for quantifying soil water relations between the crop growing alone and growing with interference from the weed is demonstrated.

Keywords

Cotton, Gossypium hirsutum L. ‘Paymaster 145’silverleaf nightshade, Solanum elaeagnifolium Cav. # SOLELCompetitioninterferencesoil water utilizationvolumetric soil watersoil moisturesoil water depletionSOLEL
Type
Weed Biology and Ecology
Information
Weed Science , Volume 36 , Issue 6 , November 1988 , pp. 740 - 746
Copyright
Copyright © 1988 by the Weed Science Society of America 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Literature Cited

1. Banks, P. A., Tripp, T. N., Wells, J. W., and Hammel, J. E. 1986. Effects of tillage on sicklepod (Cassia obtusifolia) interference with soybeans (Glycine max) and soil water use. Weed Sci. 34:143–149.Google Scholar
2. Clements, F. E., Weaver, J. E., and Hanson, H. C. 1929. Plant competition – an analysis of community functions. Publ. No. 398. Carnegie Inst., Washington, DC. 340 pp.Google Scholar
3. Davis, C. H., Smith, T. J., and Hawkins, R. S. 1945. Eradication of white horsenettle in southern Arizona. Ariz. Agric. Exp. Stn. Bull. 195. 14 pp.Google Scholar
4. Davis, R. G., Wiese, A. F., and Pafford, J. L. 1965. Root moisture extraction profiles of various weeds. Weeds 13:98–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5. Feltner, K. C., Hurst, H. R., and Anderson, L. E. 1969. Tall waterhemp competition in grain sorghum. Weed Sci. 17:214–216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6. Green, J. D., Murray, D. S., and Verhalen, L. M. 1987. Fullseason weed interference of silverleaf nightshade (Solanum elaeagnifolium Cav.) with cotton (Gossypium hirsutum). Weed Sci. 35:813–818.Google Scholar
7. Hill, L. V. and Santelmann, P. W. 1969. Competitive effects of annual weeds on Spanish peanuts. Weed Sci. 17:1–2.Google Scholar
8. Pavlychenko, T. K. 1949. Plant competition and weed control. Agric. Rev. 4:142–145.Google Scholar
9. Pavlychenko, T. K. and Harrington, J. B. 1935. Root development of weeds and crops in competition under dry farming. Sci. Agric. 16:151–160.Google Scholar
10. Shahi, H. N. 1978. Competitive effects of Chenopodium album for soil moisture and nutrients in wheat. Int. Pest Control 20(4):14, 16.Google Scholar
11. Stockton, J. R., Carreker, J. R., and Hoover, M. 1967. Sugar, oil, and fiber crops. Part 14–Irrigation of cotton and other fiber crops. Pages 661–673 in Hagan, R. M., Haise, H. R., and Edminster, T. W., eds. Irrigation of Agricultural Lands. Am. Soc. Agron. Monogr. 11, Madison, WI.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
12. Stuart, B. L., Harrison, S. K., Abernathy, J. R., Krieg, D. R., and Wendt, C. W. 1984. The response of cotton (Gossypium hirsutum) water relations to smooth pigweed (Amaranthus hybridus) competition. Weed Sci. 32:126–132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
13. Weaver, J. E. 1926. Root development of field crops. McGraw-Hill Book Co., New York. 291 pp.Google Scholar
14. Wiese, A. F. and Vandiver, C. W. 1970. Soil moisture effects on competitive ability of weeds. Weed Sci. 18:518–519.Google Scholar